Jerome

...because they can't be bothered to investigate it if one driver doesn't stop.

A few weeks ago, I had a guy hit the back of me on the Tolworth roundabout and he drove off without stopping. He was smartly dressed and in an 05 Audi A4 convertible, so probably not some uninsured ******.

I got his registration though and reported it to the Police a soon as I could (a few days later). The Met have decided not to pursue the matter.

In future I will follow the guy until he stops. If there is a subsequent breach of the peace, I will quote the fact that the Met don't investigate traffic accidents, so I had no choice but to follow the guy off the road.

If the same guy had gone through a speed camera and not responded to the NIP, I wonder if the Met would bother to follow it up then...

Snazy

I thought Tolworth fell under the border of Surrey and Met... more Surrey I though (prob wrong.)
Was there any damage to your car? Personally I would send the insurance after him at the very least.

I got hit by a friggin great lorry on the Old Kent Road years ago, that was not followed up either.
Guess it depends on the level of damage/injury.

Jerome

My rear bumper is cracked and obviously the paintwork damaged. The rear parking sensor is also broken.

I plan to set my insurance company on the guy. The amount I pay, they ruddy well better find him.

Leslie

Can't believe the police have washed their hands of a hit and run driver!

Les

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

few days to report it?

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

I had a hit and run (he ran a red light to get away from me!) back in 98, took me 40 mins to get to the police station, reg and vehicle make, still 3 months later and they "eventually" found the guy after saying the car was a ford escort (they then agreed with me that it was a mk2 golf gti 8v who had cut me up and damaged my wheel, wing and bumper) but said they wouldnt take any further action, but would give me his address (oh the thought did cross my mind to go pay him a "visit" or his car atleast! )

Tony

Jerome

It happened at around 7.00pm on a Friday night of a weekend when I was away with the TA.

I reported it on the Monday and was told I had to appear in person at a police station etc.

Snazy

Which is correct, you do have to go to the station to fill out the required form and sign it.
Its usually got to be done in 24 hours too for there to be any legal follow up. I can understand your frustration but they have to follow the rules.

Im sure getting an insurance claim out of him will hurt him more.

fitzscoob

I had the same issue a few years back. The only thing I could do was report the driver for dangerous driving.

The police must follow this up, they are not allowed to ignore a claim against a driver for dangerous driving. This should then be enough to get the guy to admit being in the accident and help you should you decide to take the matter further.

Snazy

I would say the incident was more "Driving without due care" or careless driving rather than dangerous driving. The latter being a more serious offence.

This might help...

Jerome

So if you get hit by someone, and you cannot get to a police station within 24 hours, the police do not pursue the other party? What if I had been injured or my car written off?

IMO it is a ridiculous rule. It's hardly like I waited 3 months. It's not like I was lazing around in the sun all weekend either. I was attending a military parade that involved months of planning etc.

A cynic might suggest that this rule is there so the Met can avoid having to actually do some policing.

The person manning the desk at the police station I did attend (not the Met) even hinted that the Met rarely bother following up this sort of offence. I put this down to inter-force rivally at the time. Obviously the Met's reputation travels.

Snazy

Its a very old rule mate so such a cynic would be misinformed.
If you were injured the clock would stop with you reporting to hospital or a doctors.

Laws are full of if when why's and what's, a lot of which people use to their advantage, like issue of NIP's when speeding etc

SwissTony

iTrader: (19)

Stupid rule anyway. And dont forget the fact that you as the injured party have to provide all your details and in the case of my accident where the guy did a runner, the courts came after me because they did not receive my driving licence or so they said

AllanB

I got rear ended by a driver with no insurance and the police lost the claim details and it never got investigated even though I went into a station several times and submitted another claim. Very frustrating and clearly it was the local station as Herts police head office were very helpful that said the chap was never traced despite me having his home address, work address all verified I even spokke to the chaps wife and his ex boss ( she'd just sacked him)


AllanB

Lee247

That's disgraceful. I would agree with the comment about the speed camera too

tanyatriangles

iTrader: (2)

WHAT????????? Are we REALLY saying that Plod picks and chooses what motoring crimes he will folow up?
SURELY it has nowt to do with whether THEY get anything monetary out of it? Not under Labour, who are "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

RobJenks

Nobody was hurt -just a cracked rear bumper and light .C'mon cops have far more important issues to concern themselves about.It is not a criminal matter .

Jerome

Hmm, easy to say when it's not your bumper.

However, I'm sure there are plenty of examples of the police using lots of resources for things more trivial than a minor car accident.

Where does it stop though? If police resources get more stretched, will the severity of things not warranting police attention go up. Maybe shoplifting will be next, then maybe mugging or aggravated assault. It may get to the point that you have to actually kill someone before the police put their doughnuts down.

Leslie

One day you may have cause to regret that comment.

It seems more and more that the police are not prepared to give the public the protection that they are contracted to do unless there is a chance that they may get bad publicity. There is a bigger picture which you don't seem to have noticed!

Les

tanyatriangles

iTrader: (2)

But someone's property was damaged and the person drove off.

Worse, by far, than speeding, where in 99.9999999% of the cases NO-ONE is hurt, and NOTHING is damaged, but THOSE offences are followed to the ends of the earth.............oh, sorry, THEY generate an income stream

Gordo

So who believes the Labour lies now?

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime". My ****, bring back hanging!

Even the BBC have gone off-script and shown it up for the nonsense it is:

BBC NEWS | UK | UK 'failing' on causes of crime